Tensions are escalating in Kibanda and Kifamba sub-counties of Rakai district over a parliamentary resolution, which keeps the two administrative units under Rakai as opposed to Kyotera.
Kyotera is one of the five new districts that became operational on July 1. Incensed, leaders of the two sub-counties have petitioned the Constitutional court for orders declaring the resolution of parliament null and void, as well as a permanent injunction restraining government from implementing the resolution.
The decision to petition court is part of a multipronged approach that locals in the two sub-counties are taking – some are threatening to ignore everything that goes on at Rakai district.
“At least we would rather remain under no district authority than keeping us under Rakai,” Levikaato Ndawula told The Observer on July 12.
Several meetings have been convened since January, six months before the operationalization of the new district, to resolve the impasse. The resistance from the two sub -counties stems from a feeling that they will be marginalised if left under Rakai, given the historical bad blood between Kooki county and the duo of Kyotera and Kakuuto counties.
This divide always cropped up in determining key issues such as elections and distribution of development projects and jobs in the unified Rakai district.
Until the 2011 elections when Vincent Semakula Ssettuba was defeated in the elections of the LC-V chairman, key leaders both at the district and national level always came from Kakuuto and Kyotera.
The two counties now forming Kyotera district (Kyotera and Kakuuto) also have a bigger revenue source compared to Kooki.
CONFUSION
While Kibanda and Kifamba sub-counties have been part of Kakuuto constituency, the August 15, 2015 resolution by parliament placed them under Kooki county effective July 1, 2017, which area MPs and local leaders alike have argued is inconsistent with Articles 63(2) and 179(4) of the Constitution.
In the midst of counter arguments, the two sub-county councils resolved against the parliamentary resolution and have forwarded their protest note to the ministry of Local Government for a review.
“There are minutes and resolutions from various meetings and resolutions by the councils of the sub-counties and the district council that I wrote to Parliament and ministry of Local Government but they haven’t responded,” Kakuuto MP Christopher Kalemba said on July 17.
Without a response from the ministry, Kalemba then notified the Electoral Commission, asking it to use its powers and enforce Article 63(2) of the Constitution.
“Article 63(2) is clear that no constituency can fall within more than one county and when you look at the case of the two sub-counties, the MP they voted for is that of Kakuuto, you cannot turn around and tell them that you are now represented by the MP of Kooki whom they never voted for,” Kalemba said.
Kalemba also bases his argument on Article 179(4), which requires that any alteration of the boundaries or creation of any administrative units shall be based on the necessity for effective administration and the need to bring services closer to the people.
That provision further requires one to take into account the means of communication, geographical features, density of population, economic viability and the wishes of the people concerned, not forcing them to go where they don’t want.
Interviewed yesterday, the minister of Local Government, Tom Butime, said, “The districts took effect on July 1 according to the law and there’s nothing I can do right now.”
THE PETITION
In a petition by 10 leaders of the two sub-counties led by Pius Lubega and Joseph Bajungu, the LC-III chairpersons of Kifamba and Kibanda respectively are challenging the constitutionality of the resolution of parliament that placed them under Kooki county of Rakai district as opposed to Kakuuto county of Kyotera district.
The petitioners contend that the resolution of parliament made under Article 179 to create Kyotera district carved from Rakai, consisting of Kyotera county and the sub-counties of Kyebe, Kakuuto and Kasasa in Kakuuto county and that the two sub-counties of Kibanda and Kifamba formerly in Kakuuto county be part of Kooki county consisting of Rakai district, is inconsistent with or contravenes and Article 176 (2)(b), Article 1(1) & (3) and Article 38 (1) of the Constitution.
They further claim that the resolution is also inconsistent with or contravenes the national objectives and directive principles of state policy number I (i), II (i) and II (iii) of the Constitution, which relate to decentralisation and devolution of powers.
sadabkk@observer.ug